Enter your email to subscribe:

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld a three year license suspension of an accountant convicted of a felony theft offense and false concealment of the conviction in an application for license renewal:

Based on the petitioner's larceny conviction and his false statement on his
renewal application, the board, in May, 2006,
issued to the petitioner an order to show cause why it should not
suspend, revoke, or take other action against his license. Prosecuting
counsel for the division of professional licensure moved for summary
decision. See 801 Code Mass. Regs. § 1.01(7)(h) (1998). The board
allowed the motion, concluding that the undisputed evidence showed the
petitioner had been convicted of larceny over $250, and had lied about
that conviction on his renewal application. See G.L. c. 112, §§ 61 and
87C 1/2 . The board rejected the petitioner's claim that he had
mistakenly thought his larceny conviction had been "stayed" pending
appeal--he presented no evidence to support his claim, and the board
rejected his explanation of the different answers he gave on his
applications to renew his accountant's license and to become a notary
public as "linguistic splitting of hairs." See 801 Code Mass. Regs. §
1.01(7)(h) (summary decision appropriate where no "genuine issue of
fact"). The board also concluded that, even if the petitioner had not
intended to deceive the board, he knew or should have known that his
statement in the renewal application was false.

A sanctions hearing took place, at which the petitioner and his defense
counsel in the larceny case testified. Thereafter, the board issued a
final decision in which it incorporated its earlier decision allowing
the motion for summary decision; found no mitigating circumstances;
found aggravating circumstances (a pattern of similar financial misconduct shown
by the G.L. c. 93A matter and the petitioner's criminal charges above
and beyond the larceny conviction; and the petitioner's demeanor during
the hearing); and ordered his accountant's license suspended for three
years.

The case is Kaplan v. Board of Public Accountancy, decided November 26. (Mike Frisch)